24fandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Reed Pollock
Reed's status? Didn't Peter Hock say that Reed would get the death sentence for trying to assassinate the President? But whether he died or not is never confirmed. So, I think his status should be changed to "Unknown". Anyone agree? Comp25 13:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC) : Yeah, I agree. But we should make a note of it at the end of the page so people know why it is like that. SignorSimon 14:03, 1 June 2008 (UTC) But he also spilled the beans about all kinds of stuff to avoid death row. How certain was Hock's statement? Doesn't Reed's huge confession leave room for the possibility that the death sentence was commuted for life without parole? I'm pretty sure "Unknown" is reserved for immediate danger situations. Also, check the article History for Reed: someone changed it to Unknown, saying "he might have bean exacuted sic" and Proudhug reverted, summarizing this logic with "rv; he might also have been hit by a bus". – Blue Rook 20:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)talk :The fact that it leaves open the possibility for his survival prevents his status from being listed as "deceased". It is never revealed whether or not he was taken off death row so I think he should be listed as "unknown". Makes you wonder if the same thing happened with Alexander Trepkos, whom Wayne credited as the man behind the attempted assassination of David Palmer. 06:18, August 11, 2012 (UTC) ::Hock's statement was: "Pollock's looking at a probable death sentence for his part in the assassination attempt on Wayne Palmer. Out of desperation, he's offering up everything he knows, hoping we'll show some leniency". ::Hock calls his death "probable", and his statement seems to imply that confessing to get leniency is unlikely to work. The criteria for unknown statuses is "those whose fate was not shown or explained on the series", or "If a character is not explicitly seen or mentioned to be dead, but events imply that the character could soon die". I've seen discussions regarding the "soon" of that criteria - an example was David Palmer at the end of season 2. I can't remember where, but proudhug said that had Wiki 24 been running at the end of S2, Palmer's status would be "alive" for the inter-season gap, because he was definitely alive when the latest episode finished. However, once the first episode of season 3 aired, they would then change the status to "unknown" if Palmer was not mentioned, because he may have died in the inter-season break. Now Pollock could've died in the inter-season break too, as he was not mentioned since ::But I think what makes this tricky is the time it takes for the prison system to kill someone. Isn't the average time on death row about 15 years? I dunno what I think the status should be, as I'm not too familiar with what unknown status actually represents. I think the "hit by a bus comparison" isn't particularly apt though, as Hock did say his death administered by the system was "probable", whereas buses weren't mentioned--Acer4666 (talk) 13:08, August 11, 2012 (UTC) :::All of this is much too iffy. Reed wasn't on death row last time we saw him, not by a long shot. There wasn't even a trial, or the indictment which precedes that, or the 5th Amendment Grand Jury proceeding which precedes that. Heck, knowing how things in 24 go, Reed and Carson might have been sprung from custody by their cabal's operatives. Or he suffered a stroke from the stress and is in a permanent coma, unable to stand trial for decades. All we do know is that he was last seen alive. 17:20, August 11, 2012 (UTC) Carl Webb? Just out of curiosity, why the comparison to Carl Webb in the second opening paragraph of this article? Apart from their willingness to break the law even to the extent of committing murder, I actually see very few similarities between him and Reed Pollock. I think a more appropriate comparison would be to Roger Stanton, Walt Cummings, or Charles Logan. --Grant Dempsey 10:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC) : As a matter of fact, basically everyone on the show has a "cover your butt" mentality. The comparison shouldn't be there to begin with. --Deege515 11:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC) :: I agree. --Proudhug 13:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC) Day 6 12:00am-1:00am Reed should not be credited for this appearance. It was a recorded image and we've already decided that recorded images don't count, even if the actor is credited. --Vinny2 18:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC) :Whats your take on this Proudhug? I think since he was credited, his article should reflect an appearance. ---CWY2190talk 00:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC) :: I had a good chuckle when I saw Pollock appear on the laptop, since we'd just made the decision about recorded video appearances. It's like they knew. I see no difference between this situation and Jamey Farrell's appearance in the first season finale. Like someone pointed out, if we include this, we'd have to include all of David Palmer's postumous news appearances in Day 5. The Appearances list is not a record of credits, it's a record of when the character's body was actually there on-screen. To again refer to Jamey's page, she was credited for Day 1 4:00pm-5:00pm, but didn't actually appear. Same with Teddy Hanlin in Day 1 6:00pm-7:00pm. So clearly, this isn't a record of credited appearances. We're merely recording all of the actual physical appearances of the character's body during that hour. All other appearances can be listed as notes elsewhere on the page. The credits listings are still complete and intact on the episode pages anyway, so we've got all our bases covered. :: The only question I have with this is, if we learn that the footage of Pollock was from say 9pm-10pm, should we add his appearance during that hour? Possibly, no? --Proudhug 14:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC) ::: My opinion is that we still shouldn't, because it could become a slippery slope. These are as much lists of which episodes characters appear in as they are lists of which hours, aren't they? If we add a particular hour to a character's list of appearances just because we know a video or photograph shown in a later hour was made at that time, then the next step might as well be adding every hour for every living character, regardless of whether or not they actually appeared, just because we know they existed at those times. --Grant Dempsey 11:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC) :: Well, they're not quite necessarily lists of which episodes characters appeared in, as Pollock technically did appear in 12am-1am. And of course we know they existed during each episode, but my question was based on the proposal that the lists document which hours they are physically seen to exist. But I agree, you're probably right about it being a slippery slope. Not to mention lots of potential ambiguity. --Proudhug 13:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC) Wait, why don't we footnote it? Instead of that appearance note above the appearances box, wouldn't it make sense to have it starred/asterisk'ed within the appearance table itself because it is such an exceptional case? This has usually been done for corpses, but it's also been done for voice "appearances" too. – Blue Rook 17:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)talk : We used to do that, but decided the "Appearances" list should only document actual physical appearances of the person's body and/or voice. Including video and photo appearances creates a lot of confusion, even with footnotes. --Proudhug 02:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC) :: Why don't we just make a special note indicating Reed Pollock appeared in pre-recorded footage. After all, he was credited and should recieve a spot on the appearances list. --Laisinteresting 12:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC) : There is a note under "Background information and notes." As I stated above, the Appearances list isn't a list of credits. Credits appear on episode pages. --Proudhug 15:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC) What about characters that have live teleconferences with the president (e.g. Jim Prescott, Yuri Suvarov). Sometimes they are only shown on the TV screen. Comp25 19:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC) : We currently do list those folks as making appearances, unlike Reed, because they appeared live like you said. Reed wasn't live, so the argument is that he didn't "appear". Thanks for removing the Bern appearance, me and Proudhug both missed that. : Check out Forum:Re-opening the character appearances template consensus discussion. It's long-winded but calls for careful discussion. – Blue Rook 20:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)talk Discussion re-opened Please check out this forum page for a topic very pertinent to Reed, and post your thoughts there. It is a re-opening of the consensus discussion above. – Blue Rook 20:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)talk